Cornea · 2019
Stenciling-Based "Prick and Print" Technique for Harvesting Shaped Corneal Grafts for Management of Peripheral Corneal Perforations.
СтатьяVideo-Audio MediaНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Parmar Gautam Singh, Ghodke Bhushan, Bose Sunandini, Meena Ashok Kumar
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate a new surgical technique ("prick and print") for harvesting shaped donor corneal grafts in cases with perforated peripheral ulcerative keratitis (PUK).
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case series at a tertiary center. Medical records of 13 patients with perforated PUK, who underwent tectonic eccentric keratoplasty using the stenciling-based prick and print technique during the past 1 year, were reviewed. All patients (15 eyes of 13 patients) received grafts of varying sizes and shapes (14 crescentic and 1 biconvex). Factors evaluated were tectonic integrity, graft apposition, and complications, if any. Surgical success was defined as maintenance of corneal integrity and healing of PUK.
RESULTS: Mean age of patients was 40.6 ± 19.4 years. Mean follow-up was 10 months. We achieved surgical success in 80% (12/15 eyes) of cases. Two eyes had graft infection, and regrafting (large circular graft) was performed for both. One eye developed new-site PUK, which was managed medically, and the graft remained viable tectonically. After surgery, 9 eyes achieved a best-corrected visual acuity of logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution +0.3 or better. No cases had graft rejection or peripheral anterior synechiae by final follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: The stenciling-based prick and print technique for making shaped donor corneal grafts may offer a simple, easy-to-learn surgical technique that can be used to make any shape or pattern of donor corneal grafts without involving the optical center, even in extensive peripheral corneal lesions.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case series at a tertiary center. Medical records of 13 patients with perforated PUK, who underwent tectonic eccentric keratoplasty using the stenciling-based prick and print technique during the past 1 year, were reviewed. All patients (15 eyes of 13 patients) received grafts of varying sizes and shapes (14 crescentic and 1 biconvex). Factors evaluated were tectonic integrity, graft apposition, and complications, if any. Surgical success was defined as maintenance of corneal integrity and healing of PUK.
RESULTS: Mean age of patients was 40.6 ± 19.4 years. Mean follow-up was 10 months. We achieved surgical success in 80% (12/15 eyes) of cases. Two eyes had graft infection, and regrafting (large circular graft) was performed for both. One eye developed new-site PUK, which was managed medically, and the graft remained viable tectonically. After surgery, 9 eyes achieved a best-corrected visual acuity of logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution +0.3 or better. No cases had graft rejection or peripheral anterior synechiae by final follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: The stenciling-based prick and print technique for making shaped donor corneal grafts may offer a simple, easy-to-learn surgical technique that can be used to make any shape or pattern of donor corneal grafts without involving the optical center, even in extensive peripheral corneal lesions.